In the best PCs of this year’s IFA, the resolution wars are in full swing

High-res, high-density displays are the new normal. Hopefully, software follows.

Sales of PCs have been sagging a bit lately. Neither the Ultrabook initiative nor Windows 8 have done much to boost sales, which is really too bad because the PC OEMs have been trying harder in the last year or two than in quite a while. What we're seeing from this year's IFA are laptops in the same vein as those we saw at Computex: a shift away from Ivy Bridge to Haswell and a shift away from sub-1080p resolutions to 1080p-and-up resolutions. Yes, the resolution war that has been raging in smartphones and tablets for the last two years or so has metastasized and spread to laptops.

These aren't the only PCs that were announced at IFA, but if you're in the market for a high-end convertible or Ultrabook, these are the cream of the crop (and the ones that show the general direction that the industry is heading in, even as it begins to wane). We don't have pricing and availability for all of them, but we expect most of them to be available to buy sometime this fall.

The IdeaPad Yoga 2 Pro

Enlarge/ The new Yoga 2 Pro is a high-res follow-up to one of the better convertible laptop designs on the market.

Lenovo

Lenovo is one of the only PC makers whose share of the PC market is growing at the moment, perhaps in part because it has eschewed the corporate drama engulfing HP and Dell of late (the company is also headquartered in Beijing, and China's consumer technology market is currently growing a bit faster than that of the US). Lenovo announced a few different refreshes this year, but the most impressive is probably the Yoga 2 Pro convertible.

The laptop is a fairly straightforward follow-up to last year's IdeaPad Yoga. The hinge still flips all the way back to convert the laptop into tablet mode, but it's also rigid enough to be used as a stand for the laptop that makes it into a mini touch-enabled all-in-one of sorts. The difference is that (almost) all of the specifications have been upgraded from last year's model: Haswell CPUs and new integrated GPUs are part of the package, and the new Yoga is slightly thinner and lighter than the old one at 0.61 inches thick and 3.06 pounds (at 0.68 inches and 3.4 pounds, the old Yoga was a shade heavier than most other Ultrabooks in its class). The biggest draw, however, just might be the 13.3-inch 3200×1800 touchscreen, which at 276 PPI is one of the densest you can buy in any laptop anywhere.

While that spec is impressive, we do have some misgivings that we've outlined in our post about the Yoga 2 announcement (and which were backed up by some hands-on impressions from Tested's Norman Chan). Windows 8 and 8.1 handle high-PPI displays just fine on the Start screen and in apps from the Windows Store, but third-party applications (even high-profile ones like Google Chrome) still look pretty bad when scaled on the Windows desktop, where the majority of Windows computing is still taking place. The high-density display may also be holding the laptop's battery life back—Lenovo says it gets just six hours under a very specific set of conditions (streaming video with the screen brightness set at a low 150 nits). Even that possibly-too-optimistic number is on the low side for a Haswell Ultrabook.

Finally, Lenovo's promotional spec sheet for the Yoga 2 Pro says it includes an 802.11b/g/n Wi-Fi adapter, and the absence of 802.11a from that list means that we're looking at a 2.4GHz-only Wi-Fi adapter à la the first Yoga. There is, simply put, no excuse for not shipping a 5GHz 802.11n adapter in a high-end laptop, tablet, or smartphone these days.

Despite these misgivings, we liked the original Yoga enough that we're still excited to give this one the full review treatment when it launches in October for an eminently reasonable $1,099. ThinkPad fans looking for a Yoga will also be able to get their hands on the ThinkPad Yoga for $949 in November, and people who don't care for convertible PCs may find something to like about the other, more traditional ThinkPads that the company announced earlier this week.

The Asus ZenBook UX301

Enlarge/ Asus' ZenBook UX301 looks like a worthy successor to last year's UX31A.

Asus

We won't lie—we liked the name better at Computex when it was called the ZenBook Infinity. Whatever it's called, it still looks like a promising follow-up to last year's already-good ZenBook Prime. The UX301 takes the attractive all-metal design of the Prime and coats the lid in a layer of Gorilla Glass 3. A 13.3-inch 2560×1440 touchscreen is also available as an option, though the base model comes with a 1920×1080 touchscreen identical in resolution and density to last year's model.

The internals also get the Haswell bump. AnandTech reports that the base CPUs on offer are a 1.6GHz Core i5-4200U or 1.8GHz Core i7-4500U, the same as we've seen in Ultrabooks like Acer's new Aspire S7. The more interesting option is the Core i7-4558U, which requires more power (28W TDP vs. 15W TDP in the 4200U and 4500U) but provides a substantial boost to CPU and GPU performance.

The i7-4558U is clocked at 2.8GHz, while the integrated HD 4400 GPU of the base models is replaced by Intel's Iris 5100, the second-fastest integrated GPU in the Haswell lineup. The HD 4400 isn't much of an upgrade over last year's HD 4000, but an increased number of Intel's "execution units" plus a larger power envelope should make the Iris 5100 a nice step up (faster even than the HD 5000 in the 2013 MacBook Air).

The rest of the laptop is sufficiently high-end: you've got 802.11ac Wi-Fi, Bluetooth 4.0, USB 3.0, either 4GB or 8GB of RAM, up to 512GB SSDs, and both a mini-DisplayPort and mini-HDMI port. All of this is in a laptop that's 0.61 inches thick and weighs 3.04 pounds, which makes it neither the thinnest nor lightest laptop with a 13.3-inch screen but still plenty competitive. If Asus can bring the great build quality and keyboard from the ZenBook Prime into this upgraded model, it may just end up being the Ultrabook to beat (though the price and release date will be important, and we don't know either yet).

Asus also announced the UX302, a lower-end relative to this laptop. It includes a dedicated graphics option, but you can't get the 2560×1440 screen, you get a hybrid hard drive instead of a pure SSD, you can only buy it with 4GB of RAM, and at 0.68 inches thick and 3.3 pounds it outweighs the UX301 by a bit.

The Sony Vaio Flip and Vaio Tap 11

Enlarge/ The Vaio Flip 13 is the smallest member of the family, but it still includes a nice 1080p touchscreen. Note the seam on the back of the lid.

Sony

After some hands-on time with these laptops that become tablets and this tablet that becomes a Surface-style laptop, we came to the conclusion that Sony had really learned from the mistakes it made in its first convertible laptop. The Flip's touchscreen, um, flips to cover the keyboard in a way similar to but distinct from Dell's excellent XPS 12. The Tap 11 also uses ultra-low-voltage Y-series Haswell CPUs to bring Ultrabook-level performance to something not much bigger than the Retina iPad or Nexus 10.

Enlarge/ The Tap 11 is a tablet first, but like the Surface and Surface Pro, it can be a reasonably capable laptop when called upon.

Sony

The build quality on both systems is good, and while the key travel in both the Flip laptops and the Tap 11's keyboard cover could be better, it certainly isn't the worst we've encountered. The Flip lineup is also fairly diverse—you can choose from 13-, 14-, and 15-inch screen sizes, and the 14- and 15-inch models include dedicated GPUs. 1080p displays are standard in all three Flip laptops and the Tap 11 tablet, but the 15-inch Flip also comes with a 2560×1620 display option. SSDs are standard in the 13-inch Flip and Tap 11 and are optional in the 14- and 15-inch Flips.

Neither pricing nor availability has been announced for the Flip or the Tap systems just yet, though we expect that we'll hear more in the fall.

Listing image by Asus

Promoted Comments

Native software such as IE and Office show that Windows desktop apps can work well on a high-DPI displays. 3rd party developers need to get on board. Microsoft has been evangelizing the need for high-DPI-aware applications since it improved desktop scaling in Windows Vista, many 3rd party applications still don't properly support this.

Sadly, they haven't really been forced to do so, as the Windows ecosystem simply hasn't offered the kinds of compelling hardware that would force this change--at least until products like this year's Surface Pro and the other new high-DPI laptops and tablets coming to market with Windows 8/8.1.

I sense that we are finally reaching an inflection point, where the hardware will drive the developers to do the right thing or risk losing customers to better performing alternatives.

61 Reader Comments

The sagging sales in PCs can be ascribed to lack of compelling applications. For many years hardware was the problem but today it's really software.

PCs are so good that you need a compelling argument to buy a new one. The bottleneck is not Windows which runs admirably well, considering its complexity. The bottleneck is the lack of applications which require the latest and greatest hardware. Games used to be one of the sales catalysts but they haven't kept up with the incredible advances in hardware.

Native software such as IE and Office show that Windows desktop apps can work well on a high-DPI displays. 3rd party developers need to get on board. Microsoft has been evangelizing the need for high-DPI-aware applications since it improved desktop scaling in Windows Vista, many 3rd party applications still don't properly support this.

Sadly, they haven't really been forced to do so, as the Windows ecosystem simply hasn't offered the kinds of compelling hardware that would force this change--at least until products like this year's Surface Pro and the other new high-DPI laptops and tablets coming to market with Windows 8/8.1.

I sense that we are finally reaching an inflection point, where the hardware will drive the developers to do the right thing or risk losing customers to better performing alternatives.

At this accelerated rate I wonder how long it will take before even 4k computer screens aren't considered special anymore?

Unless you're just interested in watching movies, the higher res. on Win 8 machines is wasted -and actually distracting. For some odd reason, few of the 3rd party software vendors seem compelled to increase the resolution of their applications.

Native software such as IE and Office show that Windows desktop apps can work well on a high-DPI displays. 3rd party developers need to get on board. Microsoft has been evangelizing the need for high-DPI-aware applications since it improved desktop scaling in Windows Vista, many 3rd party applications still don't properly support this.

Sadly, they haven't really been forced to do so, as the Windows ecosystem simply hasn't offered the kinds of compelling hardware that would force this change--at least until products like this year's Surface Pro and the other new high-DPI laptops and tablets coming to market with Windows 8/8.1.

I sense that we are finally reaching an inflection point, where the hardware will drive the developers to do the right thing or risk losing customers to better performing alternatives.

Firefox finally updated their browser recently (I believe it was version 22) to respect the scaling settings set by Windows. Before that I had to use NoSquint to zoom in/scale up every web page I visited because unlike IE, it completely ignored the scaling factor of 150% that I had set. However from what I've seen, it's the only third party browser to really do so.

I always feel like I'm getting trolled when people say 'It only gets six hours of battery life'.

My laptop has a 15.6" screen, 1366x768 (or whatever that resolution is), i7 Gen 1, Nvidia GT425M, and with a brand new battery, gets 50 minutes, or 2 hours if I turn off everything and turn it on very low power mode.

The 50 minutes is standard usage (word documents, web browsing, school stuff) on the lowest brightness and only wifi.

I always feel like I'm getting trolled when people say 'It only gets six hours of battery life'.

My laptop has a 15.6" screen, 1366x768 (or whatever that resolution is), i7 Gen 1, Nvidia GT425M, and with a brand new battery, gets 50 minutes, or 2 hours if I turn off everything and turn it on very low power mode.

The 50 minutes is standard usage (word documents, web browsing, school stuff) on the lowest brightness and only wifi.

No trolling intended, it's just a bit low among other Haswell Ultrabooks. For a high-end laptop these days, I'd consider 6-8 hours to be about average, more than that to be great, and less than that to be poor, but obviously those figures don't necessarily extend to old or budget systems.

I always feel like I'm getting trolled when people say 'It only gets six hours of battery life'.

My laptop has a 15.6" screen, 1366x768 (or whatever that resolution is), i7 Gen 1, Nvidia GT425M, and with a brand new battery, gets 50 minutes, or 2 hours if I turn off everything and turn it on very low power mode.

The 50 minutes is standard usage (word documents, web browsing, school stuff) on the lowest brightness and only wifi.

Yep, that's a case study in why 90% (and I'm not joking with that number) of todays laptops are absolute trash. It's no wonder the PC market is dying, the manufacturers have been shoveling out idiotically designed machines for several years now, and reserving the ones that make any sense at all to the ultra premium bracket with the highest markups. My old laptop died and I can't bring myself to suffer the downgrades of buying a new one--I have just been using a tablet instead, waiting for manufacturers to get their heads out of their asses. This article is heartening to me, as it shows some real promise in the laptop market.

For reference, my previous laptop was a Dell Inspiron 6000. It had a 1920×1200 display and cost me $700 back in 2005 (although I bought it was a really good coupon). I looked for a long time for a reasonably priced replacement and came up with nothing.

I'm kinda curious how many people prefer 6-8hr battery life vs. the tradeoff benefit of a smaller lighter battery.

I've personally never needed more than 4hrs (basically 8am-noon). The power bricks for the ultrabooks have gotten really small (compared to heft of yesteryear), so it's not a big deal to bring it with me.

There's no question that longer is better, and if you are a road warrior or student, not having to plug your laptop in during the day is a great, but as a corporate user, I'm in meetings or offices all day long. Different strokes for different folks, but I'd like 3hrs and lightweight vs 6hrs and heavier.

It's a tired saw by now, but I can't take that headline seriously until desktop monitor manufacturer's step up to the plate and start releasing > 1080 screens that don't cost as much as these laptops.

edit: And as a side note, that is probably what is hindering application developers from producing apps that scale well to these higher resolutions.

Why? Desktops are an even smaller portion of the pie than ever. Laptops absolutely dominate the PC scene. They sell something like 2:1 or more over desktops these days. Desktops are becoming niche. Desktop monitors with them. Laptops are driving where the PC is going now.

"Finally, Lenovo's promotional spec sheet for the Yoga 2 Pro says it includes an 802.11b/g/n Wi-Fi adapter, and the absence of 802.11a from that list means that we're looking at a 2.4GHz-only Wi-Fi adapter à la the first Yoga."

The spec sheet very clearly lists 802.11n, which does operate on 5GHz.

"There is, simply put, no excuse for not shipping a 5GHz 802.11n adapter in a high-end laptop, tablet, or smartphone these days."

I say again, the spec sheet very clearly lists 802.11n.

Wrong. 802.11n operates on both 2.4Ghz and 5Ghz. Without the /a/ being included, it means it only operates on a single band (because when 802.11a was introduced it ONLY worked on the 5Ghz band) and thus, does not operate on the 5Ghz band for 802.11n.

"Finally, Lenovo's promotional spec sheet for the Yoga 2 Pro says it includes an 802.11b/g/n Wi-Fi adapter, and the absence of 802.11a from that list means that we're looking at a 2.4GHz-only Wi-Fi adapter à la the first Yoga."

The spec sheet very clearly lists 802.11n, which does operate on 5GHz.

"There is, simply put, no excuse for not shipping a 5GHz 802.11n adapter in a high-end laptop, tablet, or smartphone these days."

I say again, the spec sheet very clearly lists 802.11n.

802.11n does not imply 5GHz—it CAN run on 5GHz, but it doesn't HAVE to. That's why you've got to be on the lookout for 802.11a, not because anyone still uses that standard but because it denotes an adapter that can use the 5GHz band.

Native software such as IE and Office show that Windows desktop apps can work well on a high-DPI displays. 3rd party developers need to get on board. Microsoft has been evangelizing the need for high-DPI-aware applications since it improved desktop scaling in Windows Vista, many 3rd party applications still don't properly support this.

Sadly, they haven't really been forced to do so, as the Windows ecosystem simply hasn't offered the kinds of compelling hardware that would force this change--at least until products like this year's Surface Pro and the other new high-DPI laptops and tablets coming to market with Windows 8/8.1.

I sense that we are finally reaching an inflection point, where the hardware will drive the developers to do the right thing or risk losing customers to better performing alternatives.

In fairness to third parties, MS itself hasn't comprehensively ensured its native software works on a high-DPI display. SQL Server Management Studio 2012, for example, is a hodgepodge of correct scaling, over-scaling, misaligned controls, and blurry dialogs on a high-DPI screen.

I just want more Laptops and PC screens with a different aspect ratio than 16:9. Something like 16:10 is already much better, but I have to admire Google's effort with their Chromebook Pixel and its 3:2 aspect ratio. 16:9 just seems a bit too wide.

I find it insulting that even bottom-of-the-barrel noname tablets often have higher DPI screens than most laptops. I've needed a new laptop for about two years but I simply refuse to buy any of the tripe that has been on the market for the past few years.

This trend, once it trickles down to the mid-range devices, will be most welcome.

Looks very good so far. I'm anxious to see the ones with new Atom chips though. I'm trying to replace one of the two Asus RT tablets we have with improved performance and x86 program compatibility. I am also very interested in seeing i3 hybrids with 8+ hours of battery life but I am not sure I can tolerate the fan noise...I'm assuming those are all fan cooled still.

Do the new i3/i5/i7 models support connected standby mode? IIRC, only the Atom chips had that support last year, no?

This is great to hear, but the next improvements I want to hear are quite simple. I'm a European (although this should also count for everyone) and I would like to know, with each review, whether or not a machine comes with TPM and how easy it is to install and run Linux on. Just saying, because no Microsoft o/s shall ever run on any of my machines again for reasons I shouldn't have to state.

It's a tired saw by now, but I can't take that headline seriously until desktop monitor manufacturer's step up to the plate and start releasing > 1080 screens that don't cost as much as these laptops.

edit: And as a side note, that is probably what is hindering application developers from producing apps that scale well to these higher resolutions.

Why? Desktops are an even smaller portion of the pie than ever. Laptops absolutely dominate the PC scene. They sell something like 2:1 or more over desktops these days. Desktops are becoming niche. Desktop monitors with them. Laptops are driving where the PC is going now.

Well of course I can't speak for the whole market, but perhaps I made a mistake in referring to them as "desktop monitors." I do use them with a desktop, and so does the vast majority of the office where I work. And I don't see my office as being a rare occurrence.

That anecdotal bit aside. I could get by with a laptop for the work I do but it would cost 1.5-2x the equivalent desktop price. Regardless, I (and again our whole office) use dual-monitors. The monitor market != desktop market. Indeed when I spec out my next development machine one of the main considerations will be support of -gasp- 3+ monitors. And it ultimately doesn't matter if it's a laptop or desktop driving them.

It's a tired saw by now, but I can't take that headline seriously until desktop monitor manufacturer's step up to the plate and start releasing > 1080 screens that don't cost as much as these laptops.

edit: And as a side note, that is probably what is hindering application developers from producing apps that scale well to these higher resolutions.

Why? Desktops are an even smaller portion of the pie than ever. Laptops absolutely dominate the PC scene. They sell something like 2:1 or more over desktops these days. Desktops are becoming niche. Desktop monitors with them. Laptops are driving where the PC is going now.

My work gave me a laptop because I have to travel, and two monitors because so I can get things done in the office. Monitor sales *are* down, but I part of that is the refusal to put anything new out at a workable price point. Why would I upgrade my 1080p "good enough" screen when my options are a wildly unreliable Korean model with difficult return process or a $700-1000k Dell/Apple model? Maybe if it flat out died, but I don't need a replacement when monitors are living long healthy lives now (not like the garbage 3 year lifespan models I rolled with in the 90s).

I see laptop (and to an even larger degree, tablet) growth is being driven less by cannibalizing desktops and more by the fact that there are compelling reasons to buy a new one. I mean, look at these laptops - they are way thinner, lighter, faster, longer lasting and have much higher resolutions than the laptop I bought 3 years ago. They can do things mine can't for a lot less than what I paid for mine, so it makes me want to ditch my current one and buy a new one. On the other hand, I haven't been able to justify buying new components other than a larger SSD for my 4 year old desktop because it still plays AAA releases and the price jump to 1440p gaming would be enormous. So while I used to contribute to the desktop/hardware sales most years, I don't anymore.

Neither the Ultrabook initiative nor Windows 8 have done much to boost sales, which is really too bad because the PC OEMs have been trying harder in the last year or two than in quite a while.

No, it's really good, because due to lack of demand they have to draw attention, which means more interesting products. When they sold just because it was a Dell or a thinkpad, regardless of features, that was really too bad...

As much as I like my shiny new MacBook Air, I can't help but think that Apple missed an opportunity with the screen. A "retina" display in an Apple laptop of this size and weight (subject to any changes required for the higher resolution screen) would be rather nice.

For reference, my previous laptop was a Dell Inspiron 6000. It had a 1920×1200 display and cost me $700 back in 2005 (although I bought it was a really good coupon). I looked for a long time for a reasonably priced replacement and came up with nothing.

I had the same experience 2 years ago or so. I was upgrading from an old Dell 600m that had an upgraded 1440x900 screen. The ONLY laptop I could find in the consumer space or even business space that was 15"or less was the Dell XPS. And their availability at the time on the 1920x1080 was apparently pretty low, because that upgrade option kept showing and disappearing on Dell's store. I was rather surprised to find that 5 years after my old 600m, we still hadn't progressed past the x768 screens on most all models.

To make it all more frustrating was seeing manufactures advertise all of their displays as 'HD graphics display', playing off the notion that '720p' means HD in the TV space, so it works just as well for a laptop display. Ugh. Some of the brands really required you to dive into the tech specs to find what 'HD graphics display' really meant.

Hey Andrew, you seem to have neglected to define what "IFA" stands for in the first paragraph (I have no clue what it stands for).

Yeah, and a Google search for IFA yields loads of unlikely results like International Franchise Association, International Fertilizer Industry Association, International Federation of Aromatherapists, Institute of Financial Accountants...

The Wikipedia page for IFA lists loads of possibilities, but I suspect the IFA in question is, "Internationale Funkausstellung Berlin (IFA Berlin), originally the International radio exhibition Berlin, now a consumer electronics trade fair."

Native software such as IE and Office show that Windows desktop apps can work well on a high-DPI displays. 3rd party developers need to get on board. Microsoft has been evangelizing the need for high-DPI-aware applications since it improved desktop scaling in Windows Vista, many 3rd party applications still don't properly support this.

Sadly, they haven't really been forced to do so, as the Windows ecosystem simply hasn't offered the kinds of compelling hardware that would force this change--at least until products like this year's Surface Pro and the other new high-DPI laptops and tablets coming to market with Windows 8/8.1.

I sense that we are finally reaching an inflection point, where the hardware will drive the developers to do the right thing or risk losing customers to better performing alternatives.

Fascinating info from Windows guy Thurrott - he's got info that Itunes and Chrome are the most installed windows applications. So, Microsoft is going to evangelize their enemies? I mean, credit to Google, they have a Metro version of Chrome, but how realistic is it to expect improvements to Windows apps when major Windows apps are distributed by someone who competes either directly with Windows (chrome and itunes) or with MS in the cloud (Amazon, Valve)?

Your gaming point I'm not sure about. I'm sure gaming is still driving quite a bit of hardware sales, but it's just not a huge market, esp for laptops.

For years I scurried from outlet to outlet, using laptops with roughly 2 hour battery life. When they got into the 4-6 hour range we could run a regular work day without an outlet (though batteries still degraded too quickly, losing 25% or more capacity after two years of hard living). Now I've been spoiled by the Lenovo X-series and most recently the latest MBA because I just don't have to think about battery life and that is a big deal to me.

As long as I can get to a wall socket for a couple of hours once a day I'm golden. That is liberating in ways that a high-resolution screen does not equal. Of course I want it all. I figure we're a only year or two away from that but Haswell is proving to be a solid step forward for mainstream users.

I don't get this small laptop fetish that most manufacturers have.There really good laptops in the 11"-13" range but moving higher is just disappointing....

I concur with @Marabyte, it is a shame that there are limited options in the 17" screen market for those of us with petrified eyeballs. Even the premium-level Apple MacBookPro 17", has been discontinued, so there is now no way to throw more money at the problem. Those larger laptops that remain (Alienware, et-al) are larger in form factor, with plastic chassis and higher wattage CPUs driving the need for louder under load and shorter battery life, all of which is not a great tradeoff for a large screen machine oriented at office productivity instead of gaming.

The holy grail for optically challenged users in my opinion would be a carbon fiber-bodied 17" laptop with Ultrabook specs for around $2K. Understandably, this would be a challenge to accommodate the parts cost of the 17" high-PPI display, but presumably compromises could be reached in other areas, as long as the components chosen would allow for expandability. Ideally, such a laptop would weigh slightly less than a 15" Retina MacbookPro (2.02 kg) with a similarly sleek profile.

Given the increasing numbers of tightly packaged laptops with limited expandability, i.e. proprietary SSDs, soldered RAM and lack of space for additional drives, a 17" chassis with user-accessible (empty) RAM and SSD ports for later upgrade would enable consumers to justify purchase of a premium laptop.

Games have hit the budget limit really. To take advantage of the latest hardware, they need to sell like CoD/Mario/Wii Sports does. Ironically all of those games are known for conservative graphics.

Such that PC gaming is booming right now, it's over indie titles and the availability of the back catalogue. The advances have been in funding (Kickstarter, Humble Bundle) and distribution (Steam, GoG) and not hardware. But they're no less important for that fact.

I'd be more interested in the others, the convertable, if I didn't suspect they had touch sensors equivalent to most tablets. I want to be able to handwrite notes, damnit, without making my letters like an inch tall.

It's a tired saw by now, but I can't take that headline seriously until desktop monitor manufacturer's step up to the plate and start releasing > 1080 screens that don't cost as much as these laptops.

edit: And as a side note, that is probably what is hindering application developers from producing apps that scale well to these higher resolutions.

Why? Desktops are an even smaller portion of the pie than ever. Laptops absolutely dominate the PC scene. They sell something like 2:1 or more over desktops these days. Desktops are becoming niche. Desktop monitors with them. Laptops are driving where the PC is going now.

I think the problem with high-res desktop monitors is that 1080p monitors are so cheap relative to the price of larger panels.. For $500 or so, you can get two 1080p monitors, but you can't get a single 2560x1440 monitor for less than $700. Most businesses will spring for a second monitor before they'll buy one huge one. That, in turn, keeps prices of 1080 monitors low and other monitors high.

With a laptop, you're stuck with the built-in display (at least, when you're away from your desk) so there's more of an incentive to buy the highest-res panel you can.

What is the technical issue here anyway? Can someone explain. I've never tried HiDPI on Windows, but shouldn't it be just a couple of blurry icons (for buttons etc.). What are things go bonkers and why?